Welcome to MGO's Internet Discussion Forums…Please Consider Becoming a Dues-Paying Member of the ORG….Click >>>>>HERE<<<<< for more info…………****DONATIONS**** can also be made toward MGO's Legal Defense Fund and/or MGO's Forums >>>>>HERE<<<<<

How a gun-control group got the owner of Lock N Load to quit the business

Dear MGO Members,
It is with heavy hearts that we inform you of the passing of Mike Borders mikeb32 this afternoon (5/1/2018). Mr. Borders has served the organization in multiple roles, with the most recent as President and Membership Chairman. Mike poured his heart and soul into this organization. We are honored to have served alongside him. He will be missed greatly by all that had the pleasure to know him. Please keep him and his family in your prayers tonight.

Funeral services were held Saturday, May 5th at Uhts Funeral Home in Westland.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

How a gun-control group got the owner of Lock N Load to quit the business

The first time Benjamin Bishop walked into Lock N Load and tried to buy a gun, employees at the Florida gun store turned him away — and rightly so.

So the second time he went to Lock N Load in Oldsmar, Fla., he brought a neighborhood acquaintance.As Bishop stood nearby, the 18-year-old acquaintance bought a 12-gauge shotgun for $279 in cash, court documents say.

Outside the store, the neighbor turned the 12-gauge over to Bishop, who said he wanted to use it to protect himself from gang members.

But Bishop used the weapon on his mother instead: In 2012, he shot Imari Shibata and her boyfriend as they slept in their home in Pinellas County. She’d told him that he needed to get a job and that he had to take his schizophrenia medication. Bishop was furious.

A lawsuit filed in 2014 in a Florida circuit court by the families and the Brady Center claimed that the store’s owner, Gerald Tanso, didn’t do enough to keep a dangerous weapon out of the hands of a mentally ill man with a criminal record.

The parties settled. Most of the details of the settlement are confidential, but one part was made public: Tanso agreed to sell his gun store and never sell a firearm again.

Jonathan Lowy, a Brady Center attorney involved in the case, said the organization has been going after the small percentage of gun stores that, he said, are responsible for 90 percent of the guns used in crimes.

Marion Hammer, a former president of the NRA who is now a lobbyist for the organization, said it doesn’t comment specifically on lawsuits it is not involved in, but she criticized the Brady Center’s tactics in general.

The Brady Center “is determined to find any way it can to destroy Second Amendment rights of citizens,” she said, adding: “There don’t appear to be individuals they target — it’s a cause. And if they get an individual gun shop owner in their sights, they’re going to spend whatever it takes unless the courts step in and put a stop to this malicious behavior.”

“It’s wrong to punish the seller of a legal product for doing what’s constitutionally protected,” he said in an interview. “The bad guy in this case is the murderer. You don’t go after Chrysler because a car that was sold by a dealer is used to run somebody over.”

“I don’t have concerns. I create them,”
--General "Mad Dog" MattisALL of my postings represent my personal opinions, unless otherwise stated, and do NOT reflect the policies, or opinions of any organization, including that of "MGO", or its officers.

If the dude was turned away the first time, and they could identify/remember him the second time he came in with someone else, they should have refused to sell to the person accompanying him. That much truly is common sense.

But, if some time had passed between the visits, and it's reasonable to say he wasn't remembered, then I would think this was a reasonable transaction.

If the dude was turned away the first time, and they could identify/remember him the second time he came in with someone else, they should have refused to sell to the person accompanying him. That much truly is common sense.

But, if some time had passed between the visits, and it's reasonable to say he wasn't remembered, then I would think this was a reasonable transaction.

having worked retail for years, you don't remember many customers unless they really really stand out (as a young man, only certain types of customers stood out to me). I'm not sure what stands out for gun shop people, but i'm pretty sure i wouldn't have been able to remember people that were using declined credit cards. even if the agency said "destroy card", that wouldn't have been too memorable.

"Sec. 2. All persons who are commonly known as “Greasers” or the issue of Spanish and Indian blood, ... who go armed and are not known to be peaceable and quiet persons, and who can give no good account of themselves, may be disarmed by any lawful officer, and punished..." - Disarming of "Greasers", An Act to punish Vagrants, Vagabonds, and Dangerous and Suspicious Persons” California, passed April 30, 1855.

If someone is denied a sale, you usually have their name, if not a description. At the LGS, where I worked we would notify the other dealers in the immediate area.
To be deny a sale is counter to why you are there!
From the little info on this, I'd say the dealer did have a responsibility.
Just my 2 cents.